Sat 30-Mar-13 02:52 AM | edited Sat 30-Mar-13 02:53 AM by LMMiller9
While the above explanations are correct, you should also realize that the D800 with 36mgpxls provides incredible detail and sharpness. The difference is a bit like saying that a car with 500 horsepower is faster than a car with 480 horsepower. True. But when driving these two cars, how often do you think you will feel that difference? A good chance, never.
I am not arguing for one over the other, I have the D800 it is absolutely fantastic and it is hard to imagine more detail or clarity.
I just bought a D800E because I wanted another companion to my D800. What I have found is that by using sharpening in Photoshop I can get the same sharpness as the E. Some people feel that the E is better because it requires less steps in their workflow.
Regarding moire, some people have found moire with the D800 - go figure.
I second or third all of the above. Last fall I wanted a Nikon for a trip to the Great Bear Rainforest on the northern BC coast. I wanted to capture the animals with the feel of the moss and wet mist so I bought the D800 mainly for the 36Mp sensor. The cropability was also part of my decision. Coming from a D300 I had to rethink my technique a bit. These photos were taken from a zodiac slowly floating up a river – 1/350, f5.6, ISO 1600, 70-200 f2.8 lens. The NEF images were saved as JPGs via the PS “save for web” command. They were zoomed to 25% for full frame, 100% to get a feel for how the mist looked, and 150% to show the cropping possibilities. No sharpening or anything else. The heart shaped mossy branches were run through Photo Ninja and some NIK filters. My desire was to capture the mist and the trees and rocks in the mist. I think the D800 pulled it off.